From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Toon Moene To: egcs@cygnus.com Subject: Re: FWD: FLOATING-POINT CONSISTENCY, -FFLOAT-STORE, AND X86 Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:38:00 -0000 Message-id: <3679815A.5012FA66@moene.indiv.nluug.nl> X-SW-Source: 1998-12/msg00665.html Toon> However, what I'm challenging is that we should burden Toon> the compiler with these considerations *by default* > Indeed. > I haven't followed all this, but am somewhat bemused > by it. I must say that I am *not* amused. This discussion goes into a direction that will leave us with a compiler that, although numerical-politically correct, will be generating such slow code as to be totally unuseable. > There are frequent complaints about Fortran due to the > x86 register business. All the ones I've checked have > been covered by the advice in the g77 manual to link > code frobbing the control word (which allows us to > pass paranoia). Anyone know of exceptions? Exactly. That's the test we should be aiming for - not something someone comes up with who hasn't taken the time to read the relevant (numerical analysis) texts. Sorry to be so harsh, but I'm trying to save a compiler here. To put it all in a one-liner: The compiler can't - and won't - save you from doing a numerical analysis class. -- Toon Moene (toon@moene.indiv.nluug.nl) Saturnushof 14, 3738 XG Maartensdijk, The Netherlands Phone: +31 346 214290; Fax: +31 346 214286 g77 Support: fortran@gnu.org; egcs: egcs-bugs@cygnus.com